Zeiss HD5 vs Swarovski Z5

I love my HD5 5-25 so far. I personally do not have swaroz5 but played with few and loved it too. It's also 60% more $$ than HD5 so I hope it has better optics or better something if I was buying it. Personally if I was in market got $1500-$1600 scope i would get the z5, and If i wanted to stay at around a $1000 I would get the HD5. The only thing I would change on HD5 is the z1000 reticle. It little too thick for my liking. Maybe it's because the Varmint Z reticle on my Conquest is just about perfect.

Easy choice I would take te HD5 excellent scope , great glass, locking turrets etched reticle, known to handle recoil better than swarovski and a much better buy.I can't think of a reason to go with the swarovski.

You keep making this comment with no info to support it. Where are you getting this from? Do I need to return my new z5?

I don't think you need to return your swarovski, just have known a few guys that have had swarovski's fail on rifles like 338 ultra, 338 lapua etc. actually had lenses comes loose and things brake internally. I don't know anyone that has had similar issues with a Zeiss. I think Swarovski makes a awesome scope it's just the fact that so does Zeiss at a better price and incredible reliability.

what do u mean "fish eyes" when looking thro the hd5?? im considering the hd5 for my .270 .....wouldnt mind owning the swaro but isnt the swaro plex reticle on the z5 a bit thin???? thinner than the z3?? zeiss has a great plex reticle tho and thats one reason im leaning toward the zeiss...im gonna have to look thro one a bit before purchasing tho

if i dont end up with the hd5 im considering the regular conquest in 4.5-14x50